MA City Requires Written Essay to Obtain Gun Permit

If you want to get a gun permit in this Massachusetts town you better make sure your writing skills are up to par.

A new firearm policy in Lowell, MA will require residents to write an essay before they are allowed to obtain a gun permit.

A gun-safety course is already required before anyone obtains a license to carry a gun, but the new policy on writing formal essays before obtaining an unrestricted gun license has residents making complaints with their local government.

The essay must include an explanation as to why they should receive the license and other documents must include any service history like working in the military or police force. Signed letters of recommendation must also be submitted.

Critics who spoke Tuesday, and who’ve blasted the policy before, made one last attempt at persuading Police Superintendent William Taylor to make it less onerous on applicants.

“I will never write an essay to get my rights as an American citizen,” resident Dan Gannon said.

Taylor did agree to work with one resident, a trained firearms-safety instructor, to help shape a training course applicants will be required to take. The trainer, Randy Breton, strongly criticized Taylor moments earlier for what he said was intentionally expensive training to dissuade anyone from applying for a gun permit.

“It’s beyond ridiculous,” Breton said of courses he looked into. One costs $1,100 over five days, and another doesn’t offer any sessions through the rest of the year in Massachusetts.

Councilor Rita Mercier shared frustration aired by the advocates, saying she was “very disappointed” Taylor and the residents couldn’t reach agreement after meeting last November.

“I don’t feel that we’ve reached common ground,” she said.

The city reportedly listened to resident’s complaints but still justified the new policy, giving them more arbitrary power to reject or accept applicants.

City Manager Kevin Murphy, who helped mediate the meeting between Taylor and residents, said Tuesday that the city listened to residents’ concerns. Lowell’s policy is less strict than those in many of the state’s largest cities, he said, and allows the police to look closer at each applicant individually.

“We’re no longer taking a cookie-cutter approach to issuing firearms licenses,” he said.

According to Taylor, Lowell has about 6,000 licenses-to-carry issued. The “vast majority,” he said, are restricted, which do not allow residents to openly carry guns.

A Sun review last year of state firearms data found Lowell to be among the lowest four-fifths of similar Massachusetts cities in terms of the per-capita rate at which it grants permits.

If this new policy remains you can look for Lowell to be among the very lowest in terms of gun permit grants, or some gun owners may just choose to move out of town.

Comments

“The right to keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed”
This is a fishing expedition to have citizens supply reasons for a denial. People who never excelled in school or had little opportunity at an education will be discouraged or their essay’s will be used against them. Also some people won’t sign letters of recommendation fearing liability should a shooting arise in the future.
A class action lawsuit is in order.
DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW

SUMMARY:

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

how did this moron ever become a police officer,reminds me of some mp’s i new in the 747th mp co.
in the 80’s ,guys like him are why i transferred to the 211th field artillary,maybe he needs to go live in ireland were there they have no gun rights,,cant stand cops who have no concept of living under a constitutional republic morons…

I didn’t mean to sound shrewd, and sorry if you took it that way. I was only pointing it out because we all know what kind of crap the anti-second amendment people will throw at us.
Please delete the first portion of my comment if you like.

No problem at all, Steve. I’m glad you pointed it out so I could correct it. From time to time my internal editor let’s little mistakes slip by so I’m glad we could get this one right. No offense taken at all, and I so appreciate your being a reader of the site.